Britain shared in the monetary system of the western portion of the
Empire generally, and with comparatively few exceptions the coins that
circulated here were struck in Continental mints. The subject of the
Roman coinage is too large and intricate to be even reduced to a mere
sketch in this book, and it is unnecessary, as there are many works
which treat of this branch of numismatics. The coins, however, which
were struck in Britain, and those which, wherever struck, commemorate
events in Britain,1
come within our purview, as also certain points of archaeological
interest arising from the occurrence of coins generally on Roman sites.

The first allusion to Britain on the Roman money was a triumphal arch bearing the inscription, DE BRITANN,
on some of the coins of Claudius to commemorate his triumph after his
successful invasion of our shores. Hadrian's visit in A.D. 120
gave rise to a type, which with variations appeared not only on some of
his coins, but on some of those of his successors, Antoninus Pius and
Commodus. Britannia is personified by a draped female or male, seated
on a rock, and holding a spear, javelin, or standard. By the rock is
usually a spiked shield, and in most instances the free hand rests upon
it. The male figure is wearing trousers, showing that he represents a
barbarian. The female in one instance has her right foot on a globe; in another
she is seated on a large globe surrounded by waves. The female figures
are of special interest, as they are the prototypes of the 'Britannia'
introduced by Charles II on our coins. The Caledonian victories of
Severus, in which his sons Caracalla and Geta were associated, were
commemorated on their coins, the usual type being Victory with the
inscription VICTORIAEBRI T TANICAE. After these, direct reference to Britain ceases on the Roman coinage.

The earliest evidence of a Roman mint in Britain is under Carausius (A.D. 287-293).
The mint-letters on the coins of this emperor and his successor
Allectus, prove that there were several minting places. L. and M.L. are identified as London (Londinium and Moneta Londinensis); C., CL., and MC., as Camulodunum or Clausentum (Bitterne), or possibly both places; and R S R., the most frequent combination, as Richborough (Rutupiae). The meaning of the last letters is obscure, but they may stand for Rutupiae Statio Romana. RSP. and MRS. appear to refer to the same mint. There are also other obscure initials which may relate to other places. LON. and ML. occur on coins of Diocletian and Maximianus, and PLON. (Pecunia Londinensis)
on many coins of Constantine the Great and his family. These indicate
that the London mint was in operation down to the middle of the
4th century; but there is evidence that it was revived during the
short reign of Magnus Maximus (A.D. 383-388). It is probable that the other mints ceased with Allectus.2

The coins found on sites inhabited in Roman times are often helpful in
determining the approximate period of their occupation; but without the
exercise of caution they are liable to mislead. Then, as now, some of
the money in daily circulation was old. In almost every hoard of the
era, the coins cover several or many reigns, and it is not unusual for
a few to be a century or more older than the latest. Hence the presence
of coins of emperors before the conquest of Britain and of republican
coins of the 1st and 2nd centuries B.C.,
on the sites of our Roman towns, forts, and villages, is no evidence
that these places were in existence before the Claudian conquest: these
early coins may very well have been in circulation for
some time after that event. The latest coins on a site more definitely
indicate the approximate close of its occupation, provided these are
not the latest that were in general circulation in Britain. The latest
on the sites of most towns of the era are those of Arcadius and
Honorius (A.D. 383-423), but we know
that some of these towns survived the English conquest and that those
which were eventually deserted or destroyed continued a century or more
after these reigns. The absence of the coins of later emperors is due
to the conquest of northern Gaul by the barbarians, which brought about
the severance of Britain from the rest of Europe.

The proportional numbers of the coins of the different emperors is of
service to the archaeologist. The coins found at Richborough, Caerleon,
Cirencester, Lydney, and in Pitt-Rivers' excavations at Rushmore and
Woodyates cover all or most of the era, and a comparison of their lists
shows that the proportionate numbers substantially agree. The coins of
the Constantine period are the most numerous, and those of the 'Thirty
Tyrants' (A.D. 254-284)
follow next. Or, taking the emperors whose coins are the most
numerous,— Constantine the Great heads the list; then follow,
Gallienus, Claudius Gothicus, Carausius and Constans; next, Tetricus
and Constantius II; next, Victorinus, Probus, Valens and Gratian;
and finally, Vespasian, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and
Faustina I. This enumeration must be accepted as somewhat
tentative: a tabulation of the coins found at Silchester and
Caerwent would certainly give more precise results.

Buried hoards of Roman coins have been found in all parts of the
country, not only in the vicinity of the dwellings of the time, but in
places remote from these — on moors, in woods, and among rocks. They
are usually in earthen vessels, sometimes in those of bronze or lead,
or in wooden boxes, and if found loose in the soil they were probably
placed in bags or wrapped up in cloth. Hoards of bronze coins are the
most numerous, and those of silver come next, while those of the two
together are few. Gold coins are comparatively rare, and they appear to
be always associated with silver. In several
instances gold rings and other articles of
jewellery have been found with the coins. The number of the coins
varies exceedingly. It may be anything from a dozen or so to tens of
thousands. A hoard found at Baconsthorpe, Norfolk, contained about
17,000 coins; one at Bishopswood in the Forest of Dean, 17,226; one at
Blackmore, Selbourne, 30,000; while the quantity in one near Falmouth
could only be estimated as 25
gallons! A hoard of one or two thousand coins is not unusual, but
these and higher numbers are bronze coins, occasionally with a few of
silver mixed with them, the hoards of silver coins alone or with a few
gold ones rarely exceeding five or six hundred.

The burial of treasure for safety is perhaps as ancient as man himself.
The dog, for the same reason, buries a bone, yet not for the benefit of
other dogs that may chance to find it, but for his own enjoyment at a
convenient season. That any of these coin hoards should remain to us is
accidental, and probably due in most instances to the untimely death of
the hider; but the large number so remaining indicates how common the
practice must have been in Roman Britain. The approximate dates of the
hoards, as indicated by their latest coins, prove that while the
practice was continuous, there were times when more hoards than usual
were buried or more hiders than usual failed to secure them, but
probably both contributed to the result. That these were times of
strife and disquiet is confirmed by history. The first of these
hoard-periods was shortly after the reign of Aurelius. It coincides
with a troubled state of affairs under his successor, Commodus, which
began with a serious inroad of the Caledonians, was followed in A.D. 184
by a mutiny of the army in Britain and the murder of Perennis, the
Pretorian Prefect, who had been sent to quell it, and it was not
suppressed until A.D. 187, under a new legate, Pertinax. The death of Commodus in A.D. 192
was followed by a struggle between claimants to the purple, which ended
with the victory of Severus over his rivals in A.D. 197.
The next hoard-period, and the one to which the highest number of
hoards belong, was a century later. During the last thirty years of
this century, confusion and strife prevailed in most parts of the
Empire, especially in the west, where pretender
after pretender, most of obscure origin and the
creatures of the military, seized the supreme power, the last two of
whom, Carausius and Allectus, successfully and on the whole tranquilly
held Britain for nine years. The defeat of Allectus in A.D. 296
left Diocletian and his colleagues masters of the Empire, and ended
this period of confusion. The hoards fall into two series, those
without and those with coins of Carausius and Allectus, the one series
apparently being secreted during a few years before the accession of
the former emperor, and the other during the struggle between
Constantius and Allectus. A considerable number of hoards have for
their latest coins those of Constantine the Great and his family (A.D. 306-350),
and it is probable that they were secreted when Magnentius seized the
supreme power, first in Britain and then in Gaul, in A.D. 350,
or was dispossessed of it in 353. History is silent as to what
transpired in the former country on that occasion, but these hoards
seem to indicate a disturbed state of affairs. The last great
hoard-period followed the reign of Honorius (A.D. 395-423),
when Britain, cut off from the rest of Europe, had to fight
single-handed her own battles with the over-sea barbarians, and with
results that are well known.

Coin-moulds have been found at Edington in Somerset,3 Lingwell Gate in Yorkshire,4
Wroxeter and Candover in Shropshire, Castor in Northamptonshire, and
elsewhere. They were undoubtedly used for the production of false and
debased money, but they occurred in such large numbers at the first two
places, as also on several sites in France, as to suggest official
connivance. The moulds were built up in two or three piles or columns
in such a manner that a dozen or more coins could be cast at a time. In
making the moulds, discs of fine clay were prepared, about six going to
a pile; and between every two discs a coin was pressed. The pile
completed, a notch was cut in the side so as to expose the edges of the
coins. These were then removed, and the discs were fired at a low
temperature. The discs replaced, the pile was ready for use. Two or
three such piles were placed together notch to notch, which thus formed
a channel or tube. The angles between the piles were then luted with
clay, and the molten metal was poured into the
channel and entered the cavities which had been occupied by the coins.
Most of the moulds appear to date from the 3rd century, a period
when a large amount of spurious and base money was in circulation.

The Author's Notes:

1. For list and description of these see Akerman, Coins of the Romans relating to Britain.